5 comments:

You beat me on this one to, because I can't decide. It's always easier when both are from the same era. When one paves the way for another it's tougher though. Then I have to "predict" the impact level of Miles if we switch him & Satchmo on the time line-- which becomes hypothetical & theoretical.

Ah, so Wiley Coyote is your middle name. I am under stress lately... and this weekend's fncmfpecdaafcgv2 is not helping.

Achtung! ..this comparison is a sacrilege... but I will try this:

Jazz, jazz that kips it rill, as Miles and L played it... is a chance for each voice of the composition to pipe in and be a "novice" once again.. eh?

To go back to roots of his\her childlike joy in playing that old horn, bone or string... in a phrase where [with a little help from one's friends] it launches Titan, or just barely keeps a satellite from falling back into earth's fire of friction... I dare not judge.

I was hoping you would choose something like MONK vs Beatles... but noooo.

Miles Davis took that token of entitlement a bit further than did his royal highness Satchmo, 'da furst. And that pertains to Strat's points about era and times a'changing.

Pribek just called me on a phone I rarely answer, from a phone he found while on his walk-about... Something to do about Med's and Hillbunnies, and Ballerina's.. said he was going to be offline a while longer... and that he hopes everyone is fine and dandy.. Jayne is supposed to post on his site later.

He also mentioned some other things, top secret, but swore me to secrecy upon penalty of excommunication.. but I can mention this: "Frog on a gig meets Perfection, while a Priest, Rabbi and Nun walk into a bar."

He threw his hands in the air, he said, and dropped the phone, when I mentioned Miles or Louis... but from the cosmic bohemian parlay that followed, I think he was hedging towards Miles.pdnf.. no worries.

I read once, I can't recall exactly where, that the difference between traditional jazz and modern jazz is that traditional jazz sounds like people playing against each other while modern jazz sounds like people playing while ignoring each other. That is to some extent true.

The point of distinction, it seems to me, is when the best and the brightest started playing in small combos in small clubs with tables and chairs on the dance floor. Or, the release of "Ornithology". Charlie Parker lead the session, and Miles Davis played. When it was replaced by Cool Jazz, well, there was an album that birthed the Cool, and who lead that session? Oh, yeah. And nearly every major jazz style was touched if not lead by Miles's work.

I suppose I should write a similar paragraph covering Louis Armstrong. I don't know that I can hit the depth. But he defined what it meant to be a soloist and singer in modern music.

I sometimes say that you can give an entirely accurate and mostly complete history of Jazz in four words: Louis Armstrong. Miles Davis.